The main reasons for the decline in labor productivity. Key indicators and formula for calculating labor productivity Reduction in output
QUESTION 23
Labor productivity characterizes efficiency, effectiveness of labor costs and is determined by the quantity of products produced per unit of working time, or by labor costs per unit of output or work performed. Distinguish between the productivity of living and the productivity of social (aggregate) labor.
Productivity of living labor determined by the expenditure of working time in each individual production, and productivity of social (aggregate) labor - costs of living and materialized (past) labor. The productivity of social (aggregate) labor in relation to the entire national economy is calculated as the sum of national income per person employed in the branches of material production.
In enterprises, labor productivity is defined as the cost effectiveness of only human labor and is calculated through indicators of production and labor intensity of products, between which there is an inversely proportional relationship (Fig. 3).
Rice. 3. Labor productivity indicators
Output (V)— This the quantity of products produced per unit of working time or per one average employee or worker for a certain period (hour, shift, month, quarter, year). It is calculated as the ratio of the volume of production (OP) to the cost of labor time for the production of this product (T) or to the average number of employees or workers (H):
V \u003d OP / T or V \u003d OP / H.
Note that when defining the level of labor productivity through the indicator of output, the numerator (volume of output) and the denominator of the formula (labor costs for the production of products or the average number of employees) can be expressed in different units of measurement. In this regard, depending on the denominator used, the formulas distinguish between average hourly, average daily, average monthly, average quarterly and average annual output.
Index average daily output product reflects the average volume of output produced by one worker in one day worked:
When calculating daily output days worked by a person do not include all-day downtime and absenteeism. It depends on the average hourly production of products and the degree of use of the duration of the working day:
In days \u003d In hours × P cm,
where P cm is the average actual duration of the working day (shift).
Note that if the costs labor are measured by the average number of workers, then they get an indicator of the average monthly (average quarterly, average annual) output, per one average worker (depending on which period of time the volume of production and the number of workers refer to - month, quarter, year):
Average monthly output depends on the average daily output and on the number of days worked on average by one average worker:
In a month \u003d V d × T f
In a month \u003d In an hour × T f × P cm,
where T f - the average actual duration of the working period, days.
The relationship of this indicator with the previous one is determined by the specific gravity (d) workers in the total number of PPP employees:
Indicators average quarterly And average annual output per one average payroll worker (employee) are determined similarly. Note that the volume of production of gross and marketable products can be calculated by the formula:
As for the numerator of the output indicator, then, depending on the choice of the unit of measurement, the volume of output can be expressed in natural, cost and labor units of measurement. Accordingly, there are three methods for determining output: natural (conditionally natural), cost and labor (according to normalized working hours).
natural indicators measurements labor productivity are the most reliable and accurate and more consistent with its essence, but their scope is limited. Natural indicators in determining output are used at enterprises in such industries as gas, coal, oil, electric power, forestry, etc., and conditionally natural indicators are used in the textile, cement industry, metallurgy, the production of mineral fertilizers, etc.
Compared to naturalvalue method the definition of output is universal, but it takes into account not only the change in the cost of living labor, but also to a large extent the impact of structural changes in the production program, the material consumption of products, changes in prices, etc. Output in monetary terms at the enterprise, depending on the scope of this indicator can be determined by indicators of gross, marketable, sold and net products.
labor method measurements labor productivity involves the use of labor intensity as a measure of output. In practice, it has a limited scope: at individual workplaces, in teams, at sites and in workshops that produce heterogeneous and unfinished products that cannot be measured either in natural or in value units. In most cases, normalized technological labor input at the beginning of the year is used as a product meter.
The main planned and accounting indicators labor productivity at industrial enterprises are the volume of production in kind or value terms per employee of industrial production personnel (per worked man-day or man-hour) and the labor intensity of a unit of output or work. Labor intensity ( T p ) is the cost of living labor to produce a unit of output. The indicator of labor intensity has a number of advantages over the indicator of production. It establishes a direct relationship between the volume of production and labor costs and is determined by the formula:
T p \u003d T / OP,
Where T- the time spent on the production of all products, standard hours or man-hours; OP- the volume of manufactured products in physical terms.
Note that the performance indicator is a direct indicator of labor productivity, since the greater the value of this indicator (ceteris paribus), the higher labor productivity. The indicator of labor intensity is the opposite, since the smaller the value of this indicator, the higher the productivity of labor. There is a relationship between the change in the norm of time (labor intensity) and output. If the rate of time decreases by (C n) percent, then the rate of output increases by (Y c) percent, and vice versa. This dependence is expressed by the following formulas:
Example. The time rate has decreased by 20%, then the production rate will increase by Y in \u003d (100 × 20) / (100 - 20) \u003d 2000/80 \u003d 25%. And vice versa, if the production rate increases by 25%, then the time rate will decrease by C n \u003d (100 × 25) / (100 + 25) \u003d 20%.
Depending on the composition of labor costs, included in the labor intensity of products, and their roles in the production process, distinguish technological labor intensity, labor intensity of production maintenance, production labor intensity, labor intensity of production management and total labor intensity (Fig. 16.4).
Rice. 4. The structure of the total labor intensity of manufacturing products
Technological complexity (T tech) reflects the labor costs of the main production workers-pieceworkers (T xia) and time workers (T povr):
T tech \u003d T sd + T damage,
The indicator of technological labor intensity is the most common, because the rationing of labor in an enterprise (firm) concerns workers to a greater extent, and employees to a lesser extent.
The labor intensity of production maintenance (T service) is a set of costs of auxiliary work shops of the main production (T aux) and all workers of auxiliary workshops and services (repair, energy workshop, etc.) engaged in servicing production (T flash):
T service \u003d T auxiliary + T auxiliary.
Production labor intensity(T pr) includes the labor costs of all workers, both main and auxiliary:
T pr \u003d T tech + T service.
Labor intensity of production management (That) represents the labor costs of employees (managers, specialists and employees themselves) employed both in the main and auxiliary shops (T sl.pr), as well as in general factory services of the enterprise (T word head):
T y \u003d T sl.pr + T sl.
As part of full labor intensity (T full) the labor costs of all categories of industrial and production personnel of the enterprise are reflected:
T full \u003d T tech + T service + T y.
Depending on the nature and purpose of the costs labor each of the indicated indicators of labor intensity can be design, prospective, normative, planned and actual. In planned calculations, the labor intensity of manufacturing a unit of output (type of work, service, part, etc.) and the labor intensity of a commodity output (production program) are distinguished.
Labor intensity of a unit of production(type of work, service), as already noted, is divided into technological, production and full, depending on the labor costs included in the calculations. The labor intensity of a unit of output in physical terms is determined for the entire range of products and services produced at the beginning of the planning period. With a large assortment, the labor intensity is determined by the representative products, to which all the others are listed, and by the products that occupy the largest share in the total volume of production.
The labor intensity of commodity output ( T tv ) calculated according to the following formula:
Where T i- the labor intensity of a unit of production (works, services), standard hours; OP, - the volume of output of the i-th type of product, according to the plan, the corresponding units; P- the number of items (nomenclature) of products (works, services), according to the plan.
T ore intensity of the production program defined in a similar way. Note that if the calculations use the technological (production, full) labor intensity of a unit of output (works, services), then, accordingly, we obtain the technological (production, total) labor intensity of a commodity output (production program).
The introduction of innovative measures that improve production efficiency, reduce the cost of working time per unit of output.
By multiplying the savings in the cost of working time per unit of output and the total output for the year, we get the savings in time in man-hours, i.e. reducing the labor intensity of products. By dividing this value by the nominal working time fund of one worker, we calculate the relative release of the number of workers of industrial and production personnel.
The increase in labor productivity is qualitatively determined through the relative savings in labor force according to the formula
?PT =,
where? PT - increase in labor productivity,%; CR - initial (calculated) number of PPP, calculated taking into account the planned or actual volume of production for the actual output of the base period, people; Echr - reduction (release) of the number of PPP as a result of the factors of growth in labor productivity, people.
An assessment of the implementation of the plan for the growth of labor productivity, taking into account the relative savings in labor force, is presented in Table. 11.3.
Table 11.3. Implementation of the plan for labor productivity by one worker
| № | Indicators | Last year | Reporting year | Implementation of a plan, % | Absolute increase over |
||||
| according to plan | />actually | with previous year | with a plan | nbsp; | |||||
| according to plan | actually | nbsp; | |||||||
| 1 | The cost of products accepted when calculating the average output, thousand rubles | 61 321 | 64 095 | 64 595 | 100,8 | 2774 | 3274 | +500 | nbsp; |
| 2 | The average number of PPP, pers. | 5791 | 5800 | 5789 | 99,8 | +9 | -2 | -11 | nbsp; |
| 3 | Average annual output per operating PPP (p. 1 / p. 2), r. | 10 589 | 11 051 | 11 158 | 101 | 462 | 569 | +107 | nbsp; |
| 4 | Estimated (initial) number of PPP*, pers. | 6053 (64 095 / / 10 589) | 6100 (64 555 / / 10 589) | nbsp; | |||||
| 5 | Savings in the number of PPP, pers. (page 4 - page 2) | - | 253 (6053 - - 5800) | 311 (6100 - - 5789) | nbsp; | ||||
| 6 | Growth in labor productivity (LT) (line 1 / line 2 100),% | 100 | 104,4 | 105,4 | nbsp; | ||||
| 7 | Growth in labor productivity (LT) (p. 6 - 100), % | - | 4,4 | 5,4 | nbsp; | ||||
| 8 | Implementation of the plan to increase labor productivity, % | - | - | 101,0 (105,4 / / 104,4) 100 | nbsp; | ||||
* Determined by dividing the volume of production by the output of the previous year
The overall relative decrease[*] (-), increase (+) in the number of industrial and production personnel amounted to:
| according to plan | Actually | |
| Total | -253 | -311 |
| Including by increasing the technical level of production | -231 | -186 |
| Of these, due to: | ||
| commissioning of new equipment | -183 | -127 |
| equipment upgrades | -28 | -25 |
| technology improvements | -20 | -34 |
| changes in the structure of products | -54 | -124 |
| changes in natural conditions | +160 | +256 |
| -128 | -257 | |
| Of these, due to: | ||
| expansion of service areas | -17 | -17 |
| changes in the share of cooperative deliveries | +67 | -134 |
| absenteeism reduction | -114 | -106 |
| reduction of intra-shift downtime | -64 | - |
Evaluation by calculating the fulfillment of the task for the growth of labor productivity, the production of one worker and labor savings, confirms the identity of the results. From the above data, it can be seen that the plan for increasing the productivity of one worker was fulfilled by 101% (11,158 / 11,051 · 100, or 105.4% / 104.4% · 100%).
According to the plan, the increase in labor productivity per worker was 4.4% (11,051 / 10,589 · 100 - 100, or 6053 / 5789 · 100 - 100).
The actual increase was 5.4% (11,158 / 10,589 · 100 - - 100, or 6100 / 5789 · 100 - 100).
The plan provided for an increase in output by 2,774 million rubles compared to the previous year, including through the growth of labor productivity, by 2,679.6 million rubles. (462-5800), an increase in the number of PPP- by 95.3 million rubles. (9 × 10,589).
Consequently, due to the growth of labor productivity, it was planned to obtain an increase in production of 96.6% (2679.6 / 2774?? 100). The actual increase in production amounted to 3274 million rubles. Due to the increase in labor productivity, 3294 million rubles were received. (569 5789). The decrease in the number of PPPs reduced the increase in production by 21 million rubles. (2 10 589). Quantitative measurement of factors of change in labor productivity is given in Table. 11.4.
The analysis carried out indicates that the growth of labor productivity was ensured mainly due to the technical re-equipment of production and the improvement of its organization. At the same time, the planned increase in labor productivity due to technical equipment turned out to be unfulfilled. Thus, as a result of the commissioning of new equipment, it was planned to increase the average annual output of one worker by 334 thousand rubles, i.e. by 3.16%, in fact, the increase was 2.2%, or 233 thousand rubles. Measures to reduce intra-shift downtime have not been implemented.
The influence of each of the considered factors on the overall increase in labor productivity is determined on the basis of the calculated relative savings in the number of employees of industrial and production personnel according to the following formula:
where is the increase in labor productivity for each factor; - change in the number as a result of the influence of individual groups of factors (±); Echr - total relative savings in the number of PPPs.
Calculations will be made in table. 11.5.
The increase in labor productivity due to the technical measures provided for by the plan amounted to 91.3%, or 422 thousand rubles, in fact - 59.8%, or 340 thousand rubles; due to measures to improve management, organization of production and labor according to the report - 82.6% compared to 50.6% according to the plan, which amounted to 469 and 234 thousand rubles, respectively. Due to the change in the structure of production, the share of labor productivity growth planned by the plan was overfulfilled by 18.6% (39.9-21.3).
The economic analysis of labor productivity according to the above methodology provides a unified approach to determining the factors influencing its change. The calculation of factors for increasing labor productivity is carried out in accordance with measures to improve the technical and organizational level of production. At the same time, this methodology requires further improvement, primarily by providing a unified approach to calculating the relative savings of workers in terms of improving the efficiency of the technical and organizational level of production and labor productivity.
In the context of the introduction of automated control systems, an objective necessity is the development of subsystems for the operational analysis of labor productivity. It should include:
monthly determination of the degree of implementation of the plan for labor productivity;
monthly analysis of the use of intra-shift working time and determination of its impact on daily labor productivity, analysis of the implementation and quality of labor standards, identification of factors affecting the use of working time, compliance with norms, accumulation of information for analysis based on the results of work for the year;
Table 11.4. Analysis of labor productivity due to individual factors
| Factor | Calculation of labor productivity (increase +, decrease -) |
|||
| % | thousand rubles |
|||
| plan | actually | plan | actually |
|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| | 3,98 | 3,21 | 421 | 341 |
| Including through: | | | | |
| Commissioning of new equipment | 3,16 | 2,19 | 335 | 233 |
| Equipment upgrades | 0,48 | 0,43 | 51 | 47 |
| Technology improvements | 0,34 | 0,59 | 36 | 61 |
| Changing natural conditions | -2,76 | -4,42 | -291 | -469 |
| | 0,93 | 2,14 | 98 | 226 |
| | 2,21 | 4,44 | 233 | 470 |
End of table 11.4
Table 11.5. The share of influence of each group of factors on the growth of productive labor
| Factor | The share of each factor in the total increase in labor productivity |
|||
| % | thousand rubles |
|||
| plan | report | plan | report | |
| Raising the technical level of production | 91,3 = 100 | 59,8 = 100 | 422 = | 340 = |
| Improving the organization of production and labor | 50,6 = 100 | 82,6 = 100 | 234 = | 469 = |
| Change in the structure of products | 211,3 = 100 | 39,9 = 100 | 98 = | 227 = |
| Changing natural conditions | -63,2 = - 100 | -82,3 = - 100 | -292 = | -467 = |
| Total due to all factors | 100,0 | 100,0 | 462,0 | 568,0 |
monthly analysis of the factors of change in labor productivity, as well as the calculation of reserves for the growth of labor productivity and an increase in output due to this factor.
The increase in output due to each organizational and technical factor is determined by multiplying the level of increase in the average annual output of one worker due to the i-th factor by the actual number of industrial and production personnel. According to Table. 11.4, the increase in output due to each factor was:
As can be seen from the above data, the company planned to increase the production of products, works and services in comparable prices due to organizational and technical measures, changes in the structure of products and other conditions by 2680 million rubles, in fact, this increase amounted to 3288 million rubles. The increase was due to a decrease in the share of more labor-intensive products in its total output by 740 million rubles. (1308-568) and the introduction of organizational measures for 1370 million rubles. (2721-1351). However, the failure to implement the measures of scientific and technological progress led to a decrease in output against the plan by 468 million rubles. (1974-2442), and the actual increase in the labor intensity of products due to the deterioration of natural conditions reduced the output of products against the planned one by 1027 million rubles. (2715-1688). The change in the actual increase in production against the plan due to all factors was: 3288-2680 = 608 million rubles = - 468 + (-1027) + 740 + 1370 = 615 million rubles.
The analysis of reserves for increasing labor productivity is carried out by determining, according to the plan for the next year, a decrease in the labor intensity of manufactured products (in the context of its individual types and as a whole for the enterprise). The initial data are given in table. 11.6.
Table 11.6. Reducing the cost of working time, thousand hours
| Time saving | Indicators | Change from plan |
|
| planned (reserves) | actual | ||
| Total | |||
| Including through: | 346 | 461 | +115 |
| raising the technical level of production | 82 | 33 | -49 |
| product structure changes | 64 | 182 | +118 |
| improving the organization of production and labor | 200 | 246 | +46 |
| Of these, due to: | |||
| changes in the level of cooperative deliveries | - | 35 | +35 |
| reduction of all-day, intra-shift losses and non-production costs | 119 | 114 | -5 |
| expansion of service areas | 81 | 97 | +16 |
The influence of each factor on the change in labor productivity (in percent) is determined by the formula
PT \u003d Te / Tp
where Te is an increase (decrease) in saving working time compared to the planned one due to each technical and economic factor; Tp - time spent on production.
The ratio? PT (%), multiplied by the base average annual output of an employee (PTP), shows its change (in rubles):
?PT = .
To carry out calculations for each factor, we present the initial data (Table 11.7).
To calculate these factors, the overfulfillment of the plan for increasing the annual output of production by industrial and production personnel is additionally used, which amounted to 1%, or 112.2 thousand rubles; base (last) year output - 10,589 thousand rubles; average number of employees: according to the plan - 5800, according to the report - 5789 people. The time spent on the implementation of the program was planned in the amount of 10,800 thousand man-hours. Due to the increase in labor productivity, an increase in production by 649 million rubles was obtained. (112.2 5789) compared to 651 million rubles. (112.2 5800) according to the plan, i.e. for 2 million rubles. less. The total reduction in the cost of working time is indicated in Table. 11.6. Data on the reduction of labor intensity are contained in the standards for labor intensity and calculations of its reduction. From the table. 11.7 of the data it follows that at the analyzed enterprise, the saving of working time was achieved mainly as a result of an increase in the share of cooperative deliveries and a reduction in the loss of working time.
Table 11.7. Analysis of factors for increasing the average annual output of a worker
and identification of opportunities to increase output
| Labor productivity growth factor | Calculation of the factors of change in the annual output of the working (+) against the planned | Calculation of the influence of individual factors on the volume of output (+), thousand rubles. |
|
| % | thousand rubles | ||
| Intensive: | |||
| Change in the structure of products | + 1.1 = +118 / 10,800 x x 100 | +116 = + 1,1 10 589 / / 100 | 5789 117 = + 678 |
| Change in the level of cooperative deliveries | + 0.32 = + 35 / 10,800x x 100 | + 0,34 = +0,33 10 589 / / 100 | 5789 35 = + 203 |
| Reducing labor intensity by increasing technical production | -0.05 = -49 / 10,800 x x 100 | -48 = -0,45 10 589 / / 100 | 5789 (-53) = -306 |
| Expansion of service areas | +0.15 = +16 / 10,800 x x 100 | +0,16 = +0,15 10 589 / / 100 | 5789 17 = +99 |
| Extensive: | |||
| Reduction of intra-shift, all-day losses (absenteeism) and non-production costs of working time | -0.05 = -5 / 10,800 x x 100 | -5 = -0,05 10589 / / 100 | 5789 (-5) = -28 |
| Total | +1.06 = +115 / 10,800 x x 100 | 112,2 = 1,06 10 589 / / 100 | 5789 112,2 = +649 |
The planned saving of working time (346 thousand hours) was supposed to increase the average annual output of the worker by 3.2%, or by 339 rubles.
According to the report, the time was reduced by 461 thousand hours. This increased the average annual output by 4.26%, or 451 rubles. Hence, the increase in the average annual output amounted to 112 r. (451-339).
Similarly, the increase in labor productivity due to each factor is calculated.
The methodology for analyzing the factors of change in the production of a worker and their influence on the volume of production are given in Table. 11.7.
The analysis carried out shows that such factors as changes in the structure of products, the level of cooperative deliveries, and the expansion of service areas had a decisive influence on the increase in the average annual output of the worker and the volume of production. According to the established traditional methodology for analyzing the average annual output of one PPP employee, factors such as the share of workers in the total number of PPP, the impact of indicators on the use of working time by one worker are also taken into account.
An analysis of the impact on the average annual output of the working share of workers in the total number of employees of industrial and production personnel and the average output of a worker is presented in Table. 11.8. According to the initial data given in table. 11.9, we calculate the impact of the share of workers in the total number of PPPs on the annual output of a worker.
Table 11.8
Table 11.9. Implementation of the labor plan
| Index | For the previous year | For the reporting year | Actually, % |
|||
| plan | actually | change against plan | to the previous year | to plan | ||
| A | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
| The volume of production accepted for the calculation of labor productivity, mln. | 73 332 | 76 715 | 77 468 | +753 | 105,6 | 101,0 |
| The average number of PPP | 8566 | 8696 | 8715 | +19 | 101,7 | 100,2 |
| Average number of workers | 6948 | 7235 | 7044 | -191 | 101,4 | 97,4 |
| Total number of worked, thousand: | 1640,4 | 1740,7 | 1680,7 | - | 102,5 | 96,5 |
| man-days | 12 414,7 | 13 166,7 | 12 721,3 | - | 102,5 | 96,6 |
| man-hours | ||||||
| Average annual output, thousand rubles: working | 8561 | 8822 | 8889 | +67 | 103,8 | 100,8 |
| working | 10 554 | 10 603 | 10 998 | +395 | 104,2 | 103,7 |
| Worker output, thousand rubles: hourly average | 5,907 | 5,826 | 6,089 | +0,263 | 103,1 | 104,5 |
| average daily | 44,70 | 44,07 | 46,09 | +2,02 | 103,1 | 104,6 |
| Average number of workers worked: hours | 1786,8 | 1819,8 | 1806 | -13,8 | 101,1 | 99,2 |
| days | 236,1 | 240,6 | 238,6 | -2,0 | 101,1 | 99,2 |
| Average working day, hours | 7,567 | 7,564 | 7,569 | +0,005 | 100,0 | 100,1 |
A decisive influence on the increase in the average annual output of a worker was exerted by an increase in the average annual output of a worker by 326,000 rubles. (9148-8822). Therefore, in the process of analysis, the factors of its change are determined and quantitatively measured (Table 11.10).
We find the impact on the hourly production of scientific and technical measures according to the acts on their implementation. This reporting contains data on the number of relatively released workers. Multiplying these data by the planned average annual output of a worker, we find out how much output has increased.
Table 11.10. Analysis of the average annual output of a worker
And its divisions for up to a year. With current planning, plan targets for the year are determined with their quarterly distribution. The current plan is organically linked to the long-term plan, since it clarifies and details the tasks of the long-term plan for a given year. During the implementation of the long-term plan, additional opportunities are identified to increase production efficiency, increase production output and improve its quality, which are taken into account in current planning.
In small factories or factories with a consistent technological scheme for processing raw materials, the main production shop can influence the profit of the enterprise either as a result of reducing production costs or by increasing product output. Therefore, to evaluate one hundred work, indicators such as the cost of production and output in physical terms are established.
Profitability, as well as payment for production assets, is not advisable to establish for the main divisions due to their limited influence on these indicators. Issues of technical policy are skillfully solved from the position of the enterprise as a whole by its technical services. Subdivisions have little influence on the value of fixed and working capital. The subdivision cannot influence the stock of raw materials and basic materials. Stocks of auxiliary materials (reagents, catalysts, etc.) are determined depending on the needs of the unit and the distance of transportation. The shop can influence the demand to some extent. However, it can always be controlled by general plant services, which are generally responsible for the provision of material and technical means. Therefore, the introduction to assess the work of profitability units will complicate accounting and will not make significant changes to the work of the shop. An increase in interest in improving the use of fixed assets will be facilitated by bonuses for increasing production output and improving its quality.
The volume of oil refining can be increased in two ways by building new, more powerful technological units and by improving the use of existing ones. An analysis of the production and economic activities of oil refineries showed that in recent years, due to the introduction of new, more advanced technological installations, labor productivity at these enterprises has increased by more than 30%. An increase in the production of target products and an increase in its quality also had a significant impact. Increase in production output from each ton of refined oil from 12.5 to 15.0 rubles. increased labor productivity by more than 27%.
Reducing losses and increasing the output of products in excess of the approved planned standards provide an increase in output and an increase in labor productivity. Therefore, the analysis of the fulfillment by the workers of the established technological regimes, the verification of the use of equipment and the organization of its care are the tasks of standardization studies carried out to establish technically justified norms of time and production norms.
An analysis of the materials of observation of the work of the apparatchik L. I. Stepanova showed that with some improvement in the maintenance of the workplace, the time of the main work can be increased from 207 to 306 minutes (due to the time spent to be reduced - 99 minutes). This will lead to a corresponding increase in labor productivity and an increase in output.
When it is necessary to simultaneously stimulate an increase in output and quality indicators (increasing the selection from raw materials, saving reagents, improving the use of equipment, etc.), piecework wages are inferior to time-bonus wages. With piecework wages, the wages of a worker for each percentage of overfulfillment of the norm increase by at least one percent. At
In addition to selection, serious attention must be paid to the so-called technological losses, since in their reduction there are reserves for increasing production output and reducing its cost.
The increase in production output in natural and value terms is characterized by its growth rates (J, P] and / np). Growth rates are determined by the formula
An increase in the production of AI-93 and A-72 gasoline at plant No. 1 indicates the introduction of modern processes or the reconstruction of existing plants, that is, in general, an increase in the technical level. At plant No. 2, despite a slight increase in the production of A-72 gasoline, the technical level, apparently, has not changed, and the plant continues to produce an already obsolete brand of gasoline in large quantities.
At plant No. 1, an increase in the production of high-quality products is achieved by increasing the capacity of modern progressive processes. This characterizes the increase in the technical level of the enterprise. At plant No. 2, despite a slight increase in the capacity of similar processes, their share remains small. At the same time, the share of thermal cracking is high, which indicates the need for the reconstruction of Plant No. 2.
As can be seen from Table. 89, the growth in the production of gasoline A-72, the profitability of which is lower than the average for the enterprise, led to a decrease in profit by 46 thousand rubles. At the same time, an increase in the production of highly profitable diesel fuel made it possible to obtain an additional 63 thousand rubles. arrived.
The outstripping pace of development of mechanical engineering (1.4 times), "the development of transport - one of the largest consumers of fuel and energy resources - will require an increase in the production of gasoline, diesel fuels, oils and a number of other products.
Indicators of the availability and use of production capacities are subjected to especially thorough analysis, since it is production capacities that determine the possibilities for further development of the industry, increasing production output. To do this, they check the performance of the installations, the use of their operating time, the reasons for the downtime of the installations. Based on the analysis, progressive standards are developed and identified
Such a replacement of obsolete equipment with new equipment, and a new one with the latest one, is carried out systematically and, although it requires additional capital expenditures, in general, it leads to an increase in production efficiency, since an increase in production output, a reduction in production costs due to the introduction of more progressive, high-performance processes occurs faster than the growth of fixed assets. The enterprise must renew the equipment before its physical wear and tear, if the losses from the early replacement of old equipment with a new one are less than from continuing to use the old equipment.
An important stage of the III period was the tenth five-year plan (1976-1980), which was characterized by the re-equipment of the technical base of the industry, the organization and accelerated development of progressive sub-sectors, and an increase in the production of chemical products. The chemical industry actively participated in the rise of agricultural production
The increase in production output in value terms is characterized by the rate of its growth (the first generalizing indicator in the table of production efficiency indicators) -
One of the most important areas is the deepening of oil refining, increasing the production of motor fuels instead of heating oil, which reduces the need for oil for refining, the cost of its production and exploration, and also leads to an increase in economic indicators at oil refineries. It is known that an increase in the yield of light oil products from 45 to 75% leads to an increase in profit per 1 ton of oil by 2.1 times.
Assume that a reconstruction of a polyethylene production unit has been carried out to increase output from 24.0 to 36.0 million tons.
The effectiveness of the use of labor potential and the efficiency of the organization's production activities characterize the indicator of labor productivity.
In Western practice, the term productivity is widely used as an indicator of the efficiency of the enterprise. Productivity acts as the ratio of the amount of goods, works or services produced (performed, rendered) for a certain period of time to the amount of resources spent to create or produce these products for a similar period of time.
Labor productivity- this is the most important qualitative indicator characterizing the cost effectiveness of living labor; this is the amount of production produced for a certain period per employee or the cost of working time per unit of output.
Labor productivity together with capital productivity, material intensity, production cost and production profitability form the basis of the system of indicators of the organization's performance.
The growth of labor productivity depends on many factors such as technical progress, modernization of production, improvement of professional training of personnel and their economic and social interest, etc.
The essence of labor productivity is characterized by analyzing two main approaches to the use of labor resources and labor force: extensive and intensive approaches.
The extensive development of labor resources is characterized by the involvement in labor of persons who are not yet employed in national production or are temporarily not working for some reason, or by an increase in the working time budget.
The intensive development of labor resources, which provides for a reduction in costs per unit of output, characterizes an increase in labor productivity, which is an indicator of the degree of effectiveness of human labor costs in the production of the final product per unit of time. Labor costs per unit of time are the smaller, the more products are produced per unit of time.
Labor productivity analysis indicators
The main indicators for assessing labor productivity are traditionally:
- performance indicators;
- labor intensity indicators.
Product output indicator is calculated as the ratio of the volume of production (revenue) to labor costs and shows the volume of production per unit of labor costs.
There are average hourly, average daily, average monthly and average annual output, which are defined respectively as the ratio of production volume (revenue) to the number of man-hours (man-days, man-months).
The overall performance indicator is calculated according to the following formula:
Pv \u003d V / T
Where,
Pv - production output by one worker;
B - the volume of production (revenue) of the enterprise;
T - labor indicator.
The indicator of labor productivity can be expressed in the following measurements: in kind, conditionally natural and cost.
Each measure of labor productivity in the enterprise has its own characteristic shortcomings. Cost indicators are influenced by inflation and do not very clearly characterize the real productivity of labor, physical indicators are free from inflationary influence, but are of limited use; characterize labor productivity only in the manufacture of a particular type of product.
The inverse indicator of output is - labor intensity of products. It characterizes the ratio between labor costs and the volume of production (revenue) and shows how much labor is spent on the production of a unit of output. The indicator of labor intensity in physical terms is calculated by the formula:
Separately, we mention auxiliary indicators - the time spent on performing a unit of a certain type of work or the amount of work performed per unit of time.
Factor analysis of labor productivity
The most general indicator of labor productivity is the average annual production output by one worker, which is defined as the ratio of annual production (revenue) to the average headcount.
Consider the analysis of dynamics and efficiency labor productivity by example, for which we will make a table of initial data.
Table 1. Labor productivity analysis
| No. p / p | Indicators | Unit rev. | Plan | Fact | Deviation from the plan (+/-) | Implementation of a plan, % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Marketable products | thousand roubles. | 27404,50 | 23119,60 | -4 284,90 | 84,40% |
| 2. | The average number of industrial and production personnel | people | 66 | 62 | -4 | 93,90% |
| 3. | Average number of workers | people | 52 | 46 | -6 | 88,50% |
| 3.1. | The proportion of workers in the composition of employees | % | 78,80% | 74,20% | -0,05 | 94,20% |
| 4. | Time worked by workers: | |||||
| 4.1. | man-days | days | 10764,00 | 9476,00 | -1288,00 | 88,00% |
| 4.2. | man-hours | hour | 74692,80 | 65508,00 | -9184,80 | 87,70% |
| 5. | Average working day | hour | 6,94 | 6,91 | -0,03 | 99,60% |
| 6. | Average annual output: | |||||
| 6.1. | per worker | thousand roubles. | 415,22 | 372,9 | -42,32 | 89,80% |
| 6.2. | per worker | thousand roubles. | 527,01 | 502,6 | -24,41 | 95,40% |
| 7. | Output per worker: | |||||
| 7.1. | average daily output | thousand roubles. | 2,55 | 2,44 | -0,11 | 95,80% |
| 7.2. | average hourly output | thousand roubles. | 0,37 | 0,35 | -0,01 | 96,20% |
| 8. | Average number of days worked per worker | days | 207 | 206 | -1 | 99,50% |
| 10. | Average number of hours worked per worker | hour | 1436,40 | 1424,09 | -12,31 | 99,10% |
As can be seen from the data in Table. 1, the fulfillment of the planned indicators of the average annual and average daily output of one worker differ by 0.4 percentage points (95.4% and 95.8%), which is explained by the deviation in the number of days worked compared to the plan. As a rule, the decrease in the number of days worked is affected by all-day losses of time: the provision of additional holidays, all-day downtime due to interruptions in the supply of materials or absenteeism for work without good reason.
Compared to the planned values, the actual average daily output decreased by 0.11 thousand rubles and amounted to 2.44 thousand rubles or 95.8% of the plan, while the actual average hourly output amounted to 96.2% of the plan, i.e. decreased by 3.8 percentage points, which is lower than the reduction in average daily output.
The difference in the percentage of plan fulfillment between the indicators of the average daily output and the average hourly output of one worker is explained by a decrease of 0.03 hours in the length of the working day.
Let us determine the amount of losses from a decrease in production volumes due to an increase in all-day losses of working time. The indicator is calculated by multiplying the planned value of the average daily output by the deviation of the planned and actual values of all working days worked. Due to all-day losses of working time (1288 days), the organization did not receive 3279.17 thousand rubles of commodity revenue.
The data provided make it possible to analyze the norms of unit costs for wages per ruble of production, to characterize the change in the level of the norm compared to the base period and the plan established for the reporting year, to consider the dynamics and deviation from the plan of the wage fund due to an increase in production volume.
Analysis of the average annual output per employee
The indicator of average annual output is influenced by such factors as: the share of workers in the total number of industrial and production personnel (PPP) of the organization, the number of days worked and the length of the working day.
Let us determine the influence of these factors on the average annual output of products by one employee according to the following formula:
GV \u003d Ud * D * P * CV
Where,
Ud - the share of workers in the total number of PPP,%;
D - the number of days worked by one worker per year;
P - the average length of the working day;
CV - average hourly production.
Using the method of absolute differences, we will analyze the level of influence of factors on the average annual production of products:
a) the influence of the proportion of workers in the total number of employees of the enterprise: ∆GV (sp) = ∆Ud * GVp
b) the impact of the number of days worked by one worker per year: ∆GV (d) \u003d Udf * ∆D * DVp
c) the influence of the length of the working day: ∆GV (p) = Udf * Df * ∆P * FVp
d) the influence of the average hourly output of workers: ∆GV (chv) = Udf * Df * Pf * ∆ChV
Let's use the data in Table. 1 and analyze the influence of factors on the average annual output per worker.
The average annual output in the reporting period, compared with the plan, decreased by 42.43 thousand rubles. Its decrease was due to a decrease in the share of workers in the PPP structure by 5 percentage points (the decrease in output amounted to 24.21 thousand rubles). Reducing the number of days worked by one worker per year, the length of the working day and the average hourly output. As a result, the influence of factors in the total amount is 42.43 thousand rubles.
Analysis of the average annual output per worker
Similarly, consider the dynamics of the average annual output of a worker, which is influenced by: the number of days worked by a worker per year, the average working day and the average hourly output.
In general, the influence of factors can be represented as:
GWr \u003d D * P * CV
a) influence of the number of days worked: ∆GWr(d) = ∆D*Pp*FVp
b) the influence of the length of the working day: ∆GWr(p) = Df*∆P*ChVp
c) influence of average hourly output: ∆GWr(chv) = Df*Pf*∆ChV
The analysis revealed that the change in the average hourly output of workers had the strongest impact on the decrease in the average annual output per worker - the change in this factor had the main impact on the decrease in the average annual output per worker in the amount of 24.41 thousand rubles.
Analysis of the average hourly output of workers
The average hourly output factor determines the indicators of the average daily and average hourly output of workers, which ultimately affect labor productivity.
The average hourly production is influenced by factors related to the change in the labor intensity of the product and its valuation.
The first group of factors includes indicators of unproductive time spent on correcting defects, organizing production and the technical level of production.
The second group includes factors that are directly related to changes in the volume of production due to structural shifts in the composition of products and the level of combined deliveries.
ChVusl1 = (VVPf + ∆VVPstr)/(Tf+Te-Tn)
ChVusl2 = (VVPf + ∆VVPstr)/(Tf-Tn)
Fwsl3 = (VVPf + ∆VVPstr)/Tf
Where,
VVPf - the actual volume of marketable products;
∆VVPstr - change in the cost of commercial products as a result of structural changes;
Tf - actually worked time by all workers;
Te - above-planned time savings from the implementation of scientific and technological progress;
Tn - non-productive time costs, which are made up of the cost of working time as a result of the manufacture of marriage and the correction of marriage, as well as in connection with deviations from the technical process. To determine their value, data on losses from marriage are used.
Using the chain substitution method, we calculate the influence of these factors on the average hourly output:
Let us calculate the influence of these factors on the average hourly output:a) comparing the obtained indicator NVsl1 with the planned value, we determine the influence of the labor intensity factor due to the improvement of its organization on the average hourly output:
b) the impact of over-planned time savings due to the implementation of scientific and technical progress measures:
c) the impact on the level of average hourly output of unproductive time costs is defined as:
d) change in average hourly output due to structural shifts in production:
Thus, the decrease in the indicator was primarily influenced by the decrease in labor intensity, against the background of an increase in average hourly output due to time savings due to the implementation of scientific and technical progress measures. In general, the considered output indicator decreased by 0.01 thousand rubles compared to the plan.
We summarize all the above calculations for factor analysis in the form of a table.
Table 2. Factor analysis of labor productivity
| Factor | Changes due to a factor | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Change in average hourly output, thousand rubles | Change in average annual output per worker, thousand rubles | Change in average annual output per worker, thousand rubles | Change in output, thousand rubles | |
| 1. Number of staff | -1 660,88 | |||
| 2. Average annual output of one worker | -2 624,02 | |||
| Total | -4 284,90 | |||
| 2.1. Share of workers | -24,21 | -1 501,18 | ||
| 2.2. Number of days worked by one worker per year | -2,55 | -1,89 | -117,11 | |
| 2.3. Working hours | -1,97 | -1,46 | -90,7 | |
| 2.4. Change in the average hourly output of workers | -19,89 | -14,76 | -915,03 | |
| Total | -24,41 | -42,32 | -2 624,02 | |
| 2.4.1. Organization of production (labor intensity) | -0,02 | -34,26 | -25,42 | -1 575,81 |
| 2.4.2. Raising the technical level of production | 0,02 | 27,09 | 20,1 | 1 245,94 |
| 2.4.3. Unproductive working hours | -0,01 | -19,03 | -14,12 | -875,2 |
| 2.4.5. Production structure | 0,00 | 6,31 | 4,68 | 290,04 |
| Total | -0,01 | -19,89 | -14,76 | -915,03 |
An important reserve for increasing labor productivity is the saving of working time. In this case, a decrease in the average hourly productivity of workers was revealed due to a decrease in the indicators of the organization of production (labor intensity). The positive impact from the introduction of more advanced technologies that reduce the labor costs of the enterprise (savings in the reporting period amounted to 3,500 man-hours) did not allow increasing the average hourly productivity of workers. Factors of unproductive expenses of working time also had a negative impact. They consist of the time spent on the production and repair of marriage.
It should be noted that labor productivity may decrease with a significant share of a newly developed product or due to the introduction of measures to improve its quality. Since, to improve the quality, reliability or competitiveness of the goods, additional costs of funds and labor are required. The gain from sales growth, higher price level, as a rule, covers the losses from lower labor productivity.
Bibliography:
- Grishchenko O.V. Analysis and diagnostics of financial and economic activity of the enterprise: Textbook. Taganrog: Publishing House of TRTU, 2000
- Savitskaya G.V. Analysis of the economic activity of the enterprise: a textbook. - 4th ed., revised. and additional - M.: INFRA-M, 2007.
- Savitskaya G.V. Economic analysis: textbook. - 11th ed., Rev. and additional - M.: New knowledge, 2005
What questions will you find answered in this article:
The only objective criterion by which it is possible to evaluate labor productivity in an enterprise is the competitiveness of a product in the market. Therefore, to compare performance indicators (such as the volume of production divided by the number of employees) in different companies, in my opinion, is incorrect. The results of the comparison will vary greatly depending on what is in the numerator of the fraction: price, weight, labor hour, value added, or some other parameter.
I worked for almost 20 years in senior positions in various companies in Belarus and Russia, participated in consulting projects in dozens of different industries - and here are the conclusions I formulated regarding increasing labor productivity.
Conclusion 1. In order for the enterprise to constantly develop, labor productivity must grow at a higher rate than wages. There are two ways to achieve this.
- To complicate the manufactured product, abandoning relatively technologically simple products with a low cost per unit weight in favor of more complex ones, the cost per unit of weight of which is higher. Different variants of this approach are applicable in any enterprise.
- Use more productive equipment. This method is economically viable only under the condition of serial production and only when certain production volumes are reached.
Conclusion 2. Each company should develop measures to increase labor productivity independently; moreover, different workshops of the same plant will require different methods. For example, at the production association "BelAZ" the development of such approaches was carried out by a special laboratory for the scientific organization of labor. In order to increase efficiency and productivity, they first of all improved the rationing and control of deviations from the norm centrally. Any newly introduced incentives for more intensive work were based on calculated norms, and the share of the variable part in the salary did not exceed 30%. In the smaller plant I now run, we achieve the same goals by incentivizing the search for productivity improvement reserves in every workplace; while the variable part of the salary is more than 60%. It cannot be said that one of these options is better than the other, but I would not recommend swapping them, introducing the first one at an enterprise like mine, and the second one at a company like BelAZ.
What affects labor productivity
1. Mass and serial orders. Large production volumes justify the use of expensive, but high-performance equipment and make it possible to standardize production in detail.
2. Innovative nature of the product.
3. Production planning horizon. The longer the period for which plans are drawn up, the more precise and rhythmic the production process can be made.
4. Availability of long and cheap loans or long-term investments.
5. The degree of automation of the collection of accounting information in production.
6. Increasing production volumes while maintaining the number of personnel due to the diversification of output and the manufacture of technologically more complex products.
7. Carrying out activities that stimulate the intensification of the work of each employee (first of all, the preparation and adoption of appropriate bonus provisions).
Obviously, the head of a particular enterprise cannot influence the first four factors, which are especially important for increasing labor productivity: the most essential conditions are determined by the quality of the state policy pursued. So, when our directors are scolded for the low efficiency of the companies entrusted to them, this is not always criticism at the address.
However, in a free market, CEOs can drive productivity growth through the last three factors. This may be enough to achieve a beneficial effect - even in seemingly hopeless situations. A good example is the positive development dynamics of our company. Even 10 years ago, it had negative net assets and was under external management. And today, with almost the same number of employees, the volume of output in value terms has increased by more than 11 times, and the average salary - a little more than five times. At the same time, the cost output per worker increased by almost 11 times, while the natural output (measured in tons per person), on the contrary, almost halved due to the complication of the manufactured product (see figure). The fastest way to influence the situation is the introduction of new wage schemes. I will dwell on this method in a little more detail.
Click on the picture to enlarge it
Increase productivity with premium payment plans
Each wage scheme works only as long as productivity indicators continue to rise. That is why it is so important not to miss the moment when the growth ends: it will be a signal for you that the used reserves for increasing efficiency have been exhausted and you need to look for new ones. I have developed motivation systems for hundreds of work teams, and my experience suggests that if you find the right solution, you will achieve a tangible positive result in two months. Let me tell you the system by which our company has been calculating bonuses for the workers of the machine assembly shop for the past two years.
So, in the calculation we use the following indicators.
1. Fulfillment of the workshop plan. The base (normal) value of remuneration for achieving this indicator is 60% (there is no upper limit on the size of the bonus - we use a flexible approach). The final value depends, firstly, on the percentage of the implementation of the production plan (see Table 1), and secondly, on two coefficients.
- K1 is the ratio of the output of marketable products (in rubles) to the base indicator equal to 80 million rubles. per month. The introduction of K1 encourages shop workers to look for reserves when making difficult plans and insures against paying too high salaries in case of low workload.
- K2 is the ratio of the base number of employees (35 people) to the actual one. The presence of K2 in the calculation scheme keeps the shop management from attracting an excess number of workers to fulfill the plan, because if the number exceeds the base one, the coefficient will be less than one and the total bonus will decrease. I assure you: now, without an objective need for additional staff, applications for new employees from the shop floor never arrive.
As can be seen from Table 1, the first part of the premium for the volume of production when the plan is fulfilled by 70–100% is from 0 to 40%. A flexible scale allows you to maintain a focus on results, even if the targets seem unattainable. The second term of this premium is calculated using the formula 20% × K1 × K2. Examples of calculating the premium for the volume of production for various input data are given in Table. 2.
2. Product quality. The base value of the reward for providing this parameter is 30%. The specific amount of payment is influenced, firstly, by indicators of compliance with the technological process, ascertained during internal control, and secondly, by the number of registered claims from customers. Thus, this component of the bonus is not related to labor productivity - and therefore I do not dwell on it here.
